Chicken (game)
The game of Chicken, also known as the Hawk-Dove or Snowdrift'Snowdrift' game tops 'Prisoner's Dilemma' in explaining cooperation game, is an influential model of conflict for two players in game theory. The principle of the game is that while each player prefers not to yield to the other, the outcome where neither player yields is the worst possible one for both players. The name "Chicken" has its origins in a game in which two drivers drive towards each other on a collision course: one must swerve, or both may die in the crash, but if one driver swerves and the other does not, the one who swerved will be called a "chicken," meaning a coward; this terminology is most prevalent in political science and economics. The name "Hawk-Dove" refers to a situation in which there is a competition for a shared resource and the contestants can choose either conciliation or conflict; this terminology is most commonly used in biology and evolutionary game theory. From a game-theoretic point of view, "Chicken" and "Hawk-Dove" are identical; the different names stem from parallel development of the basic principles in different research areas.Osborne and Rubenstein (1994) p. 30. The game has also been used to describe the mutual assured destruction of nuclear warfare, especially the sort of brinkmanship involved in the Cuban Missile Crisis.Russell (1959) p. 30. The game is similar to the prisoner's dilemma game in that an "agreeable" mutual solution is unstable since both players are individually tempted to stray from it. However, it differs in the cost of responding to such a deviation. This means that, even in an iterated version of the game, retaliation is ineffective, and a mixed strategy may be more appropriate. Popular versions The game of Chicken models two drivers, both headed for a single lane bridge from opposite directions. The first to swerve away yields the bridge to the other. If neither player swerves, the result is a costly deadlock in the middle of the bridge, or a potentially fatal head-on collision. It is presumed that the best thing for each driver is to stay straight while the other swerves (since the other is the "chicken" while a crash is avoided). Additionally, a crash is presumed to be the worst outcome for both players. This yields a situation where each player, in attempting to secure his best outcome, risks the worst. The phrase game of Chicken is also used as a metaphor for a situation where two parties engage in a showdown where they have nothing to gain, and only pride stops them from backing down. Bertrand Russell famously compared the game of Chicken to nuclear brinkmanship: Since the nuclear stalemate became apparent, the Governments of East and West have adopted the policy which Mr. Dulles calls 'brinkmanship'. This is a policy adapted from a sport which, I am told, is practised by some youthful degenerates. This sport is called 'Chicken!'. It is played by choosing a long straight road with a white line down the middle and starting two very fast cars towards each other from opposite ends. Each car is expected to keep the wheels of one side on the white line. As they approach each other, mutual destruction becomes more and more imminent. If one of them swerves from the white line before the other, the other, as he passes, shouts 'Chicken!', and the one who has swerved becomes an object of contempt. As played by irresponsible boys, this game is considered decadent and immoral, though only the lives of the players are risked. But when the game is played by eminent statesmen, who risk not only their own lives but those of many hundreds of millions of human beings, it is thought on both sides that the statesmen on one side are displaying a high degree of wisdom and courage, and only the statesmen on the other side are reprehensible. This, of course, is absurd. Both are to blame for playing such an incredibly dangerous game. The game may be played without misfortune a few times, but sooner or later it will come to be felt that loss of face is more dreadful than nuclear annihilation. The moment will come when neither side can face the derisive cry of 'Chicken!' from the other side. When that moment is come, the statesmen of both sides will plunge the world into destruction. Brinkmanship involves the introduction of an element of uncontrollable risk: even if all players act rationally in the face of risk, uncontrollable events can still trigger the catastrophic outcome.Dixit and Nalebuff (1991) pp. 205–222. In the "chickie run" scene from the film Rebel Without a Cause, this happens when Corey Allen's character cannot escape from the car and dies in the crash. The basic game-theoretic formulation of Chicken has no element of variable, potentially catastrophic, risk, and is also the contraction of a dynamic situation into a one-shot interaction. Notes References * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * External links * The game of Chicken as a metaphor for human conflict * Game-theoretic analysis of Chicken * Game of Chicken – Rebel Without a Cause by Elmer G. Wiens. * David M. Dikel, David Kane, James R. Wilson (2001). Software Architecture: Organizational Principles and Patterns, University of Michigan, ISBN 9780130290328 * Michael Ficco (2001). What Every Engineer Should Know about Career Management, CRC Press, ISBN 9781420076820 * David M. Dikel, David Kane, James R. Wilson (2002). Software Craftsmanship: The New Imperative, Addison-Wesley, ISBN 9780130290328 Category:Game theory Category:Evolutionary game theory da:Kylling (spilteori) de:Feiglingsspiel es:Juego del gallina ko:치킨 게임 it:Gioco del pollo lt:Kas pirmas pasitrauks (žaidimas) nl:Chicken game ja:チキンゲーム pl:Gra w cykora ro:Jocul laşului ru:Игра «Ястребы и голуби» sv:Chicken race he:שפן (משחק)